My family doesn't do holidays 'traditionally'. We rearrange them to fit our needs, we get unorthodox gifts, or sometimes no gifts at all. We make up our own ridiculous traditions that last two years, then discard them when we're bored of them. Basically, we do our own thing, and we have fun, and we laugh.

Mother's Day is different. I buy mom flowers on Mother's Day. Every year. Every year, before Mother's Day, I have the same conversation with my dad.

"You know, I get mom flowers every year. It feels like a cop out. Maybe I should do something else..."
"You mom really does like flowers...."
"You think it'd be okay?"
"She LOVES getting flowers."
"Okay. Flowers it is."

This year dad pointed out that the flowers she got last year were all green and did I do that on purpose? I had. Apparently they looked like cabbage, though. There was a strong hint to -not- do that again.

I'm not sure if Dworkin is the radfem people love to complain about, but if she is, she - like most radfems - is often misunderstood. Comes with the territory of making such provocative statements.

Also with the territory of making kinda crazy-sounding statements. Yeah there is criticism that she said heterosexual sex was almost always akin to rape, and that was indeed not really what she said.

Yeah, there's a lot of provocation, obviously. I honestly get why she'd say such things. You're utterly powerless and words are your only weapons. But the statement that all sex is rape isn't that crazy. Though it's a really crude way of saying it's always coerced. I'll try to explain the reasoning but I'm kinda tipsy at the moment (only two shots of vodka and one shot of whisky, I'm such a wuss)

Now, this all came naturally to me because I'm pretty huge on structure in the whole structure versus agency debate. So much that I'd deny the existence or significance of agency any day. This is pretty much the same reasoning, you just have to see just how all-encompassing the structures which build up our world are. You have to see the power of the patriarchy, basically. I think most people get the concept of patriarchy, but you have to realise just how influential it is. It, like other structures (capitalism, liberal democracy, etc) form us from the day we're born. They give structure (get it) to your life, forming your very mind and thus your reality. Not only do you make every decision based on the framework imposed by the patriarchy, you view everything within that context, even the most innocent things.

What this means is that both parties involved make their decisions based on thoughts 'tainted' by the patriarchy. In effect, there's no way of knowing if the woman involved made an actual concious decision (in as far as this is possible in general) or if she was forced into it by following the reasoning and the way of thinking which the patriarchy implanted in her mind. So consent becomes meaningless in the context of patriarchy and all sex becomes rape.

Problem that it's kinda hard to live with that knowledge. Gonna quote myself from a discussion I had about this earlier:

Quote:

I had a discussion about structure and agency with one of my professors once - in a African history class, no less. She raised a similar objection when it came to criminal justice. If there is no agency and our actions are determined by the structures we live in, how can we put someone on trial for any crime? Here you have to make the distinction between guilt and responsibility. By recognising the role of structure in his or her actions, we remove agency so we also remove guilt. We replace this by responsibility, which would recognise the role of structure. But it also confronts it with the day to day world and the fact that even if we recognise the structures we live in, we still have to live in them and have to set up rules. Sort of like a Social Contract thing.

So in this case, we have to make the distinction between consent within the structure of patriarchy and Consent as a theoretical concept. Consent with a big C is basically what we should strive for, which can never be reached but which we can approach within a non-patriarchal society. consent with a little c is like responsibility, the thing we refer to in day to day life and which should be our guiding light within the system. So, Consent is impossible, but consent is.

I know it sounds like a cop-out, but it's a way of confronting theory with reality.

So really, I don't think Dworkin is as crazy as she sounds. I dunno.

Anyway, I went to see two films tonight: American Pie whatever and The Avengers again. I did this with a girl I like and another friend, so I was pretty cool with whatever they wanted to see. We went to see two films because I'd gotten my hands on two free tickets (amazing luck that one) but they'd already paid for us three before I got there. So we basically had to see a second film. Then I went to a skeevy bar with the girl in question and I drank some shots and danced a bit and now I'm home.

Also talking about gender theory and agency/structure is a pleasure for me too_________________attitude of a street punk, only cutting selected words out of context to get onself excuse to let one's dirty mouth loose

I look forward to hearing the reasoning. And not just because I think people who are still advocates of structuralism are cute!

I've had a few beers (because I am not a coward) but tomorrow I might bring some philosophy and shit up ins to counter some of the crazy notions.

Like, if consent becomes meaningless then so does rape and not-rape become meaningless. If you're going to use determinism to take away all intentions then you don't get to use intention any more._________________

Joined: 09 Jul 2006Posts: 9702Location: I have to be somewhere? ::runs around frantically::

Posted: Thu May 10, 2012 2:57 am Post subject:

Aaaaaaand that is why I hate philosophy. I'm sure it is my natural leanings toward problem solving and lack of interest in detailing non-possible situations. Define the goal, move forward. I do realize I am in the minority here at sinfest.

Pleasure! Food! Strawberry basil gin drink! Trying tiny bottles of tequila so we can buy bigger bottles! Nom!_________________Before God created Las he pondered on all the aspects a woman might have, he considered which ones would look good super-inflated and which ones to leave alone.
After much deliberation he gave her a giant comfort zone. - Michael

Like, if consent becomes meaningless then so does rape and not-rape become meaningless. If you're going to use determinism to take away all intentions then you don't get to use intention any more.

Not really? Consent in patriarchal systems only becomes meaningless if you compare it to consent in non-patriarchal systems. But since we live in a patriarchy, we have to - in a way - play by its rules. Rape and not-rape have meaning in our patriarchal system and as long as we live in it, it'd just be stupid to play by another system's rules. I think your argument is comparable to the one my professor used.

And I'm not a structuralist, really. I just haven't seen anything that disproves the ideas I put forward in my earlier post. Most responses come down to 'but... but... agency... ' But hell, I'm no philosopher so what do I know.

Dennis J. Squidbunny wrote:

Willem love university!

no it boring _________________attitude of a street punk, only cutting selected words out of context to get onself excuse to let one's dirty mouth loose

Throughout my lifetime, I've never seen someone's opinion change through open honest discussion.

People's opinion change through traumatic experiences or social engineering or subtle manipulation.

Never have I witnessed a participant of a discussion saying...well thank you...you've changed my opinion.

I say if you're not ready to change your own opinion don't enter a discussion.

The pleasure? I see a person with a different opinion, I have no need to change their opinion through a discussion, or to present arguments. People form opinions mostly on feelings, and then construct arguments to justify it.

Seeing Willem debate is a pleasure. Really. I might join in on the greek austerity discussion later tonight. I actually was down in Greece last spring and talked to some leading members of Synaspismos, not to mention having gone into complete politics nerd mode the past week over the greek election._________________A cigarette is the perfect type of a perfect pleasure. It is exquisite, and it leaves one unsatisfied. What more can one want? ~Oscar Wilde, The Picture of Dorian Gray

Like, if consent becomes meaningless then so does rape and not-rape become meaningless. If you're going to use determinism to take away all intentions then you don't get to use intention any more.

Not really? Consent in patriarchal systems only becomes meaningless if you compare it to consent in non-patriarchal systems. But since we live in a patriarchy, we have to - in a way - play by its rules. Rape and not-rape have meaning in our patriarchal system and as long as we live in it, it'd just be stupid to play by another system's rules. I think your argument is comparable to the one my professor used.

By what reasoning does consent become meaningless in the context of patriarchy that does not hold for non-patriarchal systems?

Because "there is no way of knowing if she truly made the decision or was forced into it by a way of thinking" always hold true.

But that's just a brief aside. Both consent and rape explicitly require agency, because rape is the absence of consent and does not make sense without the existence of consent, to deny one denies the other._________________

Joined: 13 Jul 2006Posts: 1655Location: On the sunny side of the street

Posted: Fri May 11, 2012 4:05 am Post subject:

Then I suggest you make one. Just to be safe. *sly wink*

To add on to my list of delights: sun-ripened blackberries. Tart, tangy, and downright awesome. I acquired a blackberry sapling and put into a huge pot, where it is now delivering blackberries by the dozen. Soon to be scores. mmm..._________________WARNING: Microwave musclebear detection devices in use on these premises!